Sports are often cited as a unifying force in society with the power to bring strangers together to cheer for their hometown team (or help each other climb greased-up light poles).

But how well do the two Super Bowl cities — Boston (New England Patriots) and Philadelphia (Philadelphia Eagles) — perform on a playing field that includes measures of inclusion and opportunity? We broke down the two cities' performance on the "urban sabermetrics" of financial health, economic and racial segregation, rental housing affordability, and strength of civil society.

In Boston and Philadelphia, roughly 75 percent of low-income residents spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing. This high housing-cost burden affects their ability to build savings that can help them be more resilient when they face unexpected, negative economic events.

In 2014, Philadelphia County had 41 affordable units per 100 ELI households, while Suffolk County, where Boston is located, had 61 units per 100 ELI households. Despite having fewer ELI rental households, Suffolk County has nearly the same number of affordable units as Philadelphia County.

In 2015, public charities in the Philadelphia metropolitan area had revenue of $63.1 billion and assets of $132.5 billion, compared with revenue of $99.7 billion and assets of $281.3 billion in the Boston metropolitan area. The Philadelphia area has 16.5 public charities per 10,000 residents, and the Boston area has 28.0 public charities per 10,000 residents.

Unlike Sunday’s game, there won’t be a clear victor. But the data tell us that these metropolitan areas, much like their football teams, have strengths to leverage and weaknesses to address to win the biggest game in town.

Read the full article about Boston vs. Philadelphia in inclusivity metrics by Aaron Shroyer at Urban Institute.